<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Liberal War on Scientific American</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 09:21:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Edwards</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5335072</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joe Edwards]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5335072</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Science is an exploration of reality; both conservatives and liberals are out for their own agendas. Liberals exaggerate everything and conservatives spread religious propaganda as science.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Science is an exploration of reality; both conservatives and liberals are out for their own agendas. Liberals exaggerate everything and conservatives spread religious propaganda as science.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Snarflerator</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5334155</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Snarflerator]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2013 23:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5334155</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Now if only James Delingpole had his blog removed it&#039;d do the world a REAL favour.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now if only James Delingpole had his blog removed it&#8217;d do the world a REAL favour.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frustrating</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5309150</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frustrating]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Nov 2013 19:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5309150</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Of course these scientific magazines are on the AGW &quot;kick,&quot; it is the overwhelming consensus of modern science. You&#039;ll also find they are on the &quot;medicine&quot;  &quot;evolution&quot;  and &quot;atomic theory&quot;  kicks. You aren&#039;t used to science reporting; good science reporting reports good science. You guys clearly don&#039;t want good science - you want conservative politics. 


Sorry, in science you don&#039;t get to choose what you would prefer to be true.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course these scientific magazines are on the AGW &#8220;kick,&#8221; it is the overwhelming consensus of modern science. You&#8217;ll also find they are on the &#8220;medicine&#8221;  &#8220;evolution&#8221;  and &#8220;atomic theory&#8221;  kicks. You aren&#8217;t used to science reporting; good science reporting reports good science. You guys clearly don&#8217;t want good science &#8211; you want conservative politics. </p>
<p>Sorry, in science you don&#8217;t get to choose what you would prefer to be true.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. Skeptic</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5332074</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dr. Skeptic]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2013 11:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5332074</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A most humorous exchange between &quot;webresearcher&quot; and the article&#039;s author, in which neither side will trump the other. This makes complete sense for in today&#039;s politically polarized world politics becomes the mediator. But here is from Lee&#039;s bio at Scientific American:  &quot;In addition to pursuing career opportunities in academia, she also consults and gives public presentations about science outreach, social media and science, outreach to urban audiences, STEM diversity, and informal experiental [ sic ] education in ecology.&quot; It seems she is seeking employment in the moment, even after her PhD in Biology, and the Urban Scientist blog is but one of many, mostly not worth the read.  http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/urban-scientist/about.php?author=20
Reading through some of it, this is my take. Opinion to be sure, but hard science? Not at all. For my view as a consumer who once was a decades-long subscriber, I no longer purchase even the occasional newsstand issue. Thinned out in both depth and size and far more political than science reporting should be, I suggest that Scientific American will wither further. Hard science readers and researchers have many more avenues now than ever before in which good research and verifiable data is available, well sourced and much of it gratis. As to all those blogs listed at the SA website, I wager most are poorly paid, if paid at all. As to issue of race, Lee&#039;s own biography speaks of her advocacy for racial perspectives. If &quot;webresearcher&quot; actually researched on the web perhaps he/she would be more aware that in the fields of anthropology and beyond, the whole concept of race is radically undecided, in flux and changing as research indicates the socio-political bases for &quot;race&quot; fail to meet scientific standards. Either science falls to the self-appointed definers of &quot;race,&quot; or more likely as decades pass, &quot;race&quot; becomes ever less a scientific taxonomy and ever more simple political code, as it was in the history of the Dixie-crats and such proven KKK members as ex-Senator Byrd (D). Web research is itself stealing the &quot;choke point&quot; away from the current editors of SA, and this ex-reader and still avid science reader through many other sources (and PhD) predicts the demise of SA, morphing into just another social network. Best wishes from a Web Researcher who is not &quot;webresearcher.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A most humorous exchange between &#8220;webresearcher&#8221; and the article&#8217;s author, in which neither side will trump the other. This makes complete sense for in today&#8217;s politically polarized world politics becomes the mediator. But here is from Lee&#8217;s bio at Scientific American:  &#8220;In addition to pursuing career opportunities in academia, she also consults and gives public presentations about science outreach, social media and science, outreach to urban audiences, STEM diversity, and informal experiental [ sic ] education in ecology.&#8221; It seems she is seeking employment in the moment, even after her PhD in Biology, and the Urban Scientist blog is but one of many, mostly not worth the read.  <a href="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/urban-scientist/about.php?author=20" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/urban-scientist/about.php?author=20</a><br />
Reading through some of it, this is my take. Opinion to be sure, but hard science? Not at all. For my view as a consumer who once was a decades-long subscriber, I no longer purchase even the occasional newsstand issue. Thinned out in both depth and size and far more political than science reporting should be, I suggest that Scientific American will wither further. Hard science readers and researchers have many more avenues now than ever before in which good research and verifiable data is available, well sourced and much of it gratis. As to all those blogs listed at the SA website, I wager most are poorly paid, if paid at all. As to issue of race, Lee&#8217;s own biography speaks of her advocacy for racial perspectives. If &#8220;webresearcher&#8221; actually researched on the web perhaps he/she would be more aware that in the fields of anthropology and beyond, the whole concept of race is radically undecided, in flux and changing as research indicates the socio-political bases for &#8220;race&#8221; fail to meet scientific standards. Either science falls to the self-appointed definers of &#8220;race,&#8221; or more likely as decades pass, &#8220;race&#8221; becomes ever less a scientific taxonomy and ever more simple political code, as it was in the history of the Dixie-crats and such proven KKK members as ex-Senator Byrd (D). Web research is itself stealing the &#8220;choke point&#8221; away from the current editors of SA, and this ex-reader and still avid science reader through many other sources (and PhD) predicts the demise of SA, morphing into just another social network. Best wishes from a Web Researcher who is not &#8220;webresearcher.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Greenfield</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5301248</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 13:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5301248</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If someone calls you names, you can call them names back on your own blog. 



You don&#039;t use your employer&#039;s science blog to do it... or act entitled to abuse that forum even though your employer tells you not to with a pressure campaign.


Speaking as a blogger and freelancer, if I had the same experience, I wouldn&#039;t complain about it here on Frontpage. If I really felt the need to talk about it, I would do it on my own blog.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If someone calls you names, you can call them names back on your own blog. </p>
<p>You don&#8217;t use your employer&#8217;s science blog to do it&#8230; or act entitled to abuse that forum even though your employer tells you not to with a pressure campaign.</p>
<p>Speaking as a blogger and freelancer, if I had the same experience, I wouldn&#8217;t complain about it here on Frontpage. If I really felt the need to talk about it, I would do it on my own blog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: websearcher</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5301212</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[websearcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 12:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5301212</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I know what RTA stands for. But it does not look like you do. 

Here, let me help you out. The editor first says this:

&quot;My brief attempt to clarify, posted with the belief that “saying something is better than saying nothing,” clearly had the opposite effect. With 20/20 hindsight, I wish I had simply promised a fuller reply when I was able to be better connected and more thorough.&quot;


So, clearly she had to rethink her knee jerk response. When she did, she also posted this:

&quot;... I can add that we intend to discuss how we can better investigate and publicize such problems in general and search for solutions with Dr. Lee and with the wider scientific community. With the help of Dr. Lee as an author, Scientific American plans to provide a thoroughly reported feature article about the current issues facing women in science and the related research in the coming weeks. I am personally grateful to Dr. Lee for her support in these endeavors and am looking forward to working with her on these issues.&quot;



Not only did she apologize to Dr. Lee (and yeah, she has a phd) she is looking forward to working with her on future issues.  Does not look like like the editor was browbeaten. It simply looks like an initial rush to judgement and then in hindsight not only re-posted the original article, she apologized profusely. 


Too bad people on the right do not have the same ethics. Next time - try not doing what the SA editor did, rush to judgement and put out a knee-jerk response.


Get it now? Good.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know what RTA stands for. But it does not look like you do. </p>
<p>Here, let me help you out. The editor first says this:</p>
<p>&#8220;My brief attempt to clarify, posted with the belief that “saying something is better than saying nothing,” clearly had the opposite effect. With 20/20 hindsight, I wish I had simply promised a fuller reply when I was able to be better connected and more thorough.&#8221;</p>
<p>So, clearly she had to rethink her knee jerk response. When she did, she also posted this:</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230; I can add that we intend to discuss how we can better investigate and publicize such problems in general and search for solutions with Dr. Lee and with the wider scientific community. With the help of Dr. Lee as an author, Scientific American plans to provide a thoroughly reported feature article about the current issues facing women in science and the related research in the coming weeks. I am personally grateful to Dr. Lee for her support in these endeavors and am looking forward to working with her on these issues.&#8221;</p>
<p>Not only did she apologize to Dr. Lee (and yeah, she has a phd) she is looking forward to working with her on future issues.  Does not look like like the editor was browbeaten. It simply looks like an initial rush to judgement and then in hindsight not only re-posted the original article, she apologized profusely. </p>
<p>Too bad people on the right do not have the same ethics. Next time &#8211; try not doing what the SA editor did, rush to judgement and put out a knee-jerk response.</p>
<p>Get it now? Good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Fergerson</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5301141</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fergerson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 09:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5301141</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Launch an attack&quot;? Seriously? I would consider calling someone a &quot;whore&quot; as a first shot (incidentally, kudos for your restraint).

It is indeed controversial, especially when we call a spade a spade, in other words &quot;blogger&quot;, not &quot;freelancer&quot;. Bloggers still don&#039;t get the respect &quot;real writers&quot; (full-time or freelance) get regardless of their credentials (or lack of them) and Dr. Lee&#039;s case is a prime example. Bloggers started working for free (the obvious implication is that free content has no value) but that&#039;s changing as so-called mainstream publications try to catch up with the 21st century and host bloggers on their sites.

Since the point was indeed whether she should have chosen to &quot;work for free&quot; (submit unpaid content to a blog on another mainstream publication&#039;s site due to her already having a blog on SciAm) or accept being called an &quot;urban whore&quot; because she thought her content had value, where would you suggest as an appropriate place to air it?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Launch an attack&#8221;? Seriously? I would consider calling someone a &#8220;whore&#8221; as a first shot (incidentally, kudos for your restraint).</p>
<p>It is indeed controversial, especially when we call a spade a spade, in other words &#8220;blogger&#8221;, not &#8220;freelancer&#8221;. Bloggers still don&#8217;t get the respect &#8220;real writers&#8221; (full-time or freelance) get regardless of their credentials (or lack of them) and Dr. Lee&#8217;s case is a prime example. Bloggers started working for free (the obvious implication is that free content has no value) but that&#8217;s changing as so-called mainstream publications try to catch up with the 21st century and host bloggers on their sites.</p>
<p>Since the point was indeed whether she should have chosen to &#8220;work for free&#8221; (submit unpaid content to a blog on another mainstream publication&#8217;s site due to her already having a blog on SciAm) or accept being called an &#8220;urban whore&#8221; because she thought her content had value, where would you suggest as an appropriate place to air it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joel Raupe</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5301065</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joel Raupe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 05:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5301065</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Precisely. There&#039;s a famous picture from the 2000 presidential campaign, of George W. Bush kissing a little African-American school girl. It was not propagated to win the votes of Black voters.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Precisely. There&#8217;s a famous picture from the 2000 presidential campaign, of George W. Bush kissing a little African-American school girl. It was not propagated to win the votes of Black voters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Greenfield</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5301002</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 02:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5301002</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RTA



Read


The


Article]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RTA</p>
<p>Read</p>
<p>The</p>
<p>Article</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: websearcher</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300980</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[websearcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 01:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300980</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nice. Pretending not to get what I said. I guess that&#039;s how you troll.

So, lets redo the question, shall we? 
You said - &quot;She reversed herself after outside pressure from liberal activists&quot;



And to that I say - &quot;Where do you get that she reversed herself from outside pressure?&quot; Certainly not from her apology. 


So - one more time - Where are you pulling that out from?


Get it now? Good.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice. Pretending not to get what I said. I guess that&#8217;s how you troll.</p>
<p>So, lets redo the question, shall we?<br />
You said &#8211; &#8220;She reversed herself after outside pressure from liberal activists&#8221;</p>
<p>And to that I say &#8211; &#8220;Where do you get that she reversed herself from outside pressure?&#8221; Certainly not from her apology. </p>
<p>So &#8211; one more time &#8211; Where are you pulling that out from?</p>
<p>Get it now? Good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Greenfield</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300957</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 01:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300957</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You just told me where I got it from. Now you&#039;re pretending you don&#039;t know.


Troll better]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You just told me where I got it from. Now you&#8217;re pretending you don&#8217;t know.</p>
<p>Troll better</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: websearcher</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300921</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[websearcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 23:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300921</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And you pulled that out from where? It is certainly not in her apology. Try again, bud.


You should take your own advice. RTA, buddy. And after you are done, do it again.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And you pulled that out from where? It is certainly not in her apology. Try again, bud.</p>
<p>You should take your own advice. RTA, buddy. And after you are done, do it again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Greenfield</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300841</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300841</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[She reversed herself after outside pressure from liberal activists.


That&#039;s the topic of the article


RTA]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>She reversed herself after outside pressure from liberal activists.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s the topic of the article</p>
<p>RTA</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: websearcher</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300784</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[websearcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300784</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Twitter response is what you based your article on? You did know that she subsequently reversed herself and published an apology along with the article, correct?


RTA, back at ya.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Twitter response is what you based your article on? You did know that she subsequently reversed herself and published an apology along with the article, correct?</p>
<p>RTA, back at ya.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Greenfield</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300779</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300779</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Liberal activists were furious when Scientific American editor  Mariette
 DiChristina wrote, “Scientific American is a publication for 
discovering science. The post was not appropriate for this area &amp; 
was therefore removed.”]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Liberal activists were furious when Scientific American editor  Mariette<br />
 DiChristina wrote, “Scientific American is a publication for<br />
discovering science. The post was not appropriate for this area &amp;<br />
was therefore removed.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Greenfield</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300778</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300778</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Liberal activists were furious when Scientific American editor  Mariette
 DiChristina wrote, “Scientific American is a publication for 
discovering science. The post was not appropriate for this area &amp; 
was therefore removed.”


RTA]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Liberal activists were furious when Scientific American editor  Mariette<br />
 DiChristina wrote, “Scientific American is a publication for<br />
discovering science. The post was not appropriate for this area &amp;<br />
was therefore removed.”</p>
<p>RTA</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: websearcher</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300768</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[websearcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300768</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I did. And no they didn&#039;t deem it inappropriate. They could not confirm and when they did, they put it back up. 


Read the article.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I did. And no they didn&#8217;t deem it inappropriate. They could not confirm and when they did, they put it back up. </p>
<p>Read the article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: websearcher</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300763</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[websearcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300763</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tsk...tsk. Does not look like you did enough research when you wrote your article. If you had, you would have seen this - 

&quot;Editor’s note (10/14/13): This post was originally published on Friday, October 11, 2013, at 16:58, and taken down within the hour. As fully detailed here, we could not quickly verify the facts of the blog post and consequently for legal reasons we had to remove it. Email to the editor referenced in this post to elicit his comments has gone unanswered. Biology Online would not disclose his identity or give out additional contact information and other efforts to identify him to solicit a response have been unsuccessful. Biology Online has confirmed the exchange. This post is therefore being republished as of October 14th at 4:46pm.&quot;





So - once they confirmed that what she said was true, they put it back up. Next time, before writing an article, try doing some research. You will be more credible that way.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tsk&#8230;tsk. Does not look like you did enough research when you wrote your article. If you had, you would have seen this &#8211; </p>
<p>&#8220;Editor’s note (10/14/13): This post was originally published on Friday, October 11, 2013, at 16:58, and taken down within the hour. As fully detailed here, we could not quickly verify the facts of the blog post and consequently for legal reasons we had to remove it. Email to the editor referenced in this post to elicit his comments has gone unanswered. Biology Online would not disclose his identity or give out additional contact information and other efforts to identify him to solicit a response have been unsuccessful. Biology Online has confirmed the exchange. This post is therefore being republished as of October 14th at 4:46pm.&#8221;</p>
<p>So &#8211; once they confirmed that what she said was true, they put it back up. Next time, before writing an article, try doing some research. You will be more credible that way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Greenfield</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300761</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300761</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SA did decide it was inappropriate.


Read the article]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SA did decide it was inappropriate.</p>
<p>Read the article</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: websearcher</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-liberal-war-on-scientific-american/comment-page-1/#comment-5300755</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[websearcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208676#comment-5300755</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Inappropriate for SA&quot;? What makes you guys the expert on what should or should not go on SA? Isn&#039;t that something best left to SA?

First you said this - 
&quot;Unfortunately Scientific America was not too picky about whom it let through the door. ....
Danielle Lee blogged the usual empty nonsense. Bugs she saw. Food she ate. ....&quot;



But now you agree that her previous blogs were &quot;loosely about science&quot;? Which is it? Empty nonsense or loosely about science?


And again - why is it a concern of people on the right who or what another magazine chooses to publish?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Inappropriate for SA&#8221;? What makes you guys the expert on what should or should not go on SA? Isn&#8217;t that something best left to SA?</p>
<p>First you said this &#8211;<br />
&#8220;Unfortunately Scientific America was not too picky about whom it let through the door. &#8230;.<br />
Danielle Lee blogged the usual empty nonsense. Bugs she saw. Food she ate. &#8230;.&#8221;</p>
<p>But now you agree that her previous blogs were &#8220;loosely about science&#8221;? Which is it? Empty nonsense or loosely about science?</p>
<p>And again &#8211; why is it a concern of people on the right who or what another magazine chooses to publish?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 761/810 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-30 04:29:09 by W3 Total Cache -->